GeneralJoe344, I agree somewhat, but I also respect Enterprise because unlike Discovery it at least put the effort to fit with the rest of Trek. The writing staff and production crew did a ton of work to make sure ships were in line with canon, characters fit, stories fit(somewhat looking at TCW), and I think they did a fantastic job.

Now we have Discovery and a severe lack of people who worked on previous Trek shows.

In hopes of bringing some clarity to the subject of whether the designs of ships in Discovery are lore-friendly and period-correct, I decided to do a little project. Here are the fruits of the last couple days' labor.

Original Shenzhou design:

My tweaked version:

I'll let you all judge which looks more appropriate to Discovery's setting.

Source of the post Destructor, I respect your view on Enterprise, but I myself enjoyed it, but it was by no means the biggest failure. Discovery has that dishonour. I believe one reason (among many, I'm sure) why you didn't like Enterprise is because it didn't focus on philosophy, but on war .

No, that was not my problem with Enterprise. I'm a spacetravel nerd. My problem was that it rewrote the existing history of the future. It didn't fit. The ship design was lazy(the producers wanted to use the Akira class design unaltered - the art dept had to push hard to get the funding to make the ship even remotely period-appropriate), and the depiction of our early voyages bore far too much similarity to 24th century life and nearly none to 21st century life.In short, I didn't find it a believable depiction of our future.TOS and TNG have those few extra centuries to iron out the kinks in human spaceflight, and so their push-button lifestyle makes sense, but Enterprise should have had more of a NASA feel to it. More science, engineering, and right-stuff muddling through. So many missed opportunities.So it was unbelievable to me and hurt the overall credibility of the franchise. And, taken on their own, the episodes were weird and cheesy and most of the time the characters seemed to have a sixth sense about being in a prequel.But that's only why I didn't like Enterprise.I think it was a failure in the eyes of Paramount/CBS bean-counters because it haemorrhaged viewers and alienated the fanbase so much that it ended up getting cancelled. Yes, it did better than TOS, but TOS got the ball rolling, so it gets a pass. Judging by the reception so far, Discovery doesn't seem to be a repeat performance - although CBS are keeping their streaming figures close to their chests.

Harb, great work - she looks much more like a Federation ship now. Only other thing I'd change is the font on the registry.

Source of the post but Enterprise should have had more of a NASA feel to it. More science, engineering, and right-stuff muddling through. So many missed opportunities.

Then that wouldn't really be Star Trek. The Declaration Enterprise was in the 2120s, possibly before, and the ships before that were offshoots of the Phoenix warp ship. There isn't any time in Earth's history in Trek for a "NASA feel" since the Vulcans radically changed the Earth approach to interstellar travel.

Telling people not to believe lies without attempting to debunk them is an inneffective strategy.

Nevertheless, it did prompt me to research it a little.

Bad Robot is not involved. Alex Kurtzman is involved via his own production company Secret Hideout.It's possible SH is some kind of BR derivative and retains the rights package that Bad Robot accessed via Paramount, but it's hard to know.

They have the rights to TOS. They licence out the TOS designs and products using the TOS stuff, like books, comics and toys.

During the split with Viacom. Paramount retained the rights to make Star Trek movies and to distribute (home release etc) the existing ones.CBS owns the Star Trek license and Paramount made the movies under CBS' license, which means CBS also owns anything Paramount makes under the license.